IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ijameu/175023.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Managing risks or stifling innovation? Risk, hazard and uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Dibb, Sue

Abstract

In the UK 1 million people suffer food poisoning, with 20,000 ending up in hospital, at a total cost to the UK of £1.5bn a year. We are not currently putting appropriate time and resources towards addressing the most significant food risks. Science is not absolute. It never ‘proves’ safety, nor uniquely dictates particular decisions. Rather, it provides crucial indications of risks and uncertainties. Risk assessment doesn’t address difficulties assigning probabilities under states of uncertainty, for example with BSE or with endocrine disrupters. Risk managers need to take account of a wide range of factors when deciding on appropriate courses of action including political, social as well as ethical. The precautionary principle says; ‘be careful’ when we’re unable to determine clear risk assessments under various kinds of incertitude. A risk-based approach can obscure how ethical issues fit into decision making, (like animal welfare, social implications environmental impacts, consumer choice). Much risk controversy is really about the politics of technology. Currently we don’t have effective spaces for discussing or deciding “which way to go?” The public are typically sophisticated at weighing up risks and benefits with uncertainty and don’t expect ‘zero risk’. What’s needed is a democratic space for deliberating the implications of plural interests and values.

Suggested Citation

  • Dibb, Sue, 2013. "Managing risks or stifling innovation? Risk, hazard and uncertainty," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 2(3), pages 1-5, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ijameu:175023
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.175023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/175023/files/125_Dibb.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.175023?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ijameu:175023. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifmaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.